Ann Coulter is coming under fire from liberals everywhere for -- gasp!! -- openly explaining what it is that Christians believe. Right Wing News has the transcript. i'm not going to post the beginning, because its mostly blustering back and forth between the two, but by all means go and read the entire thing, too. Here is what I think best sums up the point Ann was trying to make:

"From the October 8 edition of CNBC's The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch:

DEUTSCH: Welcome back to The Big Idea. During the break, Ann said she wanted to explain her last comment. So I'm going to give her a chance. So you don't think that was offensive?

COULTER: No. I'm sorry. It is not intended to be. I don't think you should take it that way, but that is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews. We believe the Old Testament. As you know from the Old Testament, God was constantly getting fed up with humans for not being able to, you know, live up to all the laws. What Christians believe -- this is just a statement of what the New Testament is -- is that that's why Christ came and died for our sins. Christians believe the Old Testament. You don't believe our testament.

DEUTSCH: You said -- your exact words were, "Jews need to be perfected." Those are the words out of your mouth.

COULTER: No, I'm saying that's what a Christian is.

DEUTSCH: But that's what you said -- don't you see how hateful, how anti-Semitic --

COULTER: No!

DEUTSCH: How do you not see? You're an educated woman. How do you not see that?

COULTER: That isn't hateful at all.

DEUTSCH: But that's even a scarier thought. OK --

COULTER: No, no, no, no, no. I don't want you being offended by this. This is what Christians consider themselves, because our testament is the continuation of your testament. You know that. So we think Jews go to heaven. I mean, [Rev. Jerry] Falwell himself said that, but you have to follow laws. Ours is "Christ died for our sins." We consider ourselves perfected Christians. For me to say that for you to become a Christian is to become a perfected Christian is not offensive at all."

Now, like John Hawkins, I'm a little mystified about the whole "following all the laws" part of the discussion. But the basic point is accurate. Christianity is basically an add-on to Judaism, to put it simply.

What the controversy here is over, I have no idea. I'm guessing its simply because Ann Coulter spoke openly to a liberal media hack about her belief in Christianity, a religion constantly coming under attack in this country. Therefore, people must be "offended" because anything that Ann Coulter says must be offensive to someone!

So, once again Ann Coulter has opened her giant, hate spouting mouth on national television. You can find the info here:

http://politicalticker.blog...

In short she has said that all Jewish people should be "perfected" to Christianity. Not ok.

We'll give you $1000 if you send us a video of you pelting Ann Coulter with bagels. You've got 1 week. Get moving people.

Sign up here (http://www.bragster.com/signup) and click disagree in order to join the bet. To win the prize you need to be over 18 and have to post your video in the comment section below.

And we're not paying you to do it, we're paying for the video. It's not our responsibility if you get arrested, sued, stalked by right-wing fanatics or if Coulter lights you on fire.

There's a couple things about this that I find mildly amusing.

First, throw bagels?! Wow. That's pretty lame. I think this guy might be a few McNuggets short of a Happy Meal.

Second, and really the better point, isn't it interesting how liberals tend to react when conservatives say something they don't like? There are cases all across the country of liberals burning conservative newspapers, unplugging microphones, causing near riots to try to stop a conservative speaker, and (most notably in Ann Coulter's case, although it has also happened to David Horowitz and William Kristol), throwing pies. There are a few conservatives who debase themselves to this level, but by and large, its liberals becoming unhinged -- trying to keep conservatives from making a point, or insulting said conservative and their values, because they then never have to argue it.

I guess intelligent, reasonable debate is not an option for this guy, and many liberals. Rather than respond to what he disagreed about Ann Coulter's statements, he just insults her and asks people to throw bagels at her.

Oh, but he isn't paying anyone to actually throw bagels at her -- just to have video of it, in case there's some person who happened to have thrown bagels at her a few years ago and got it on tape, yet it somehow escaped the attention of the media or Coulter herself.

Don't you love it? So-called men wanting to attack a woman. More proof that democrat men have been drained of their testosterone. Glad they continually pick on women -- otherwise known as "people their own size"...

Oh and one more thing. I guess the reason so many on the left call her "Man Coulter" is so the democrat men who attack her can feel less "light in their shoes" when they're throwing their punches, so to speak.

Thirty years or so ago, I saw a bumper sticker that approximates orthodox Christian theology:

"Christians Aren't Perfect, Just Forgiven."

IOW, most Christian denominations and sects believe that Christ, the Son of God, died as a sacrifice for the forgiveness of the past, present and future sins of humanity. This unbelieveable act of God's Grace allows those who believe in this Divine Sacrifice to be relieved not only of their own sins but also the sins of their past and future generations.

Indeed, Christians believe that all those who seek and accept Christ's Sacrifice will be granted salvation. No exceptions. Jews, Gentiles, Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics, Buddhists, and those without any belief at all can accept this gift until the moment of death.

That is the teaching of the Thief on the Cross with Jesus, who was assured of paradise because of his acceptance of the gift of grace while dying with Jesus.

What Coulter said is not inconsistent with Christian theology. Nor is it "hateful".

Right on. Sometimes what Ann says sounds shocking (but that's mostly because the MSM takes it completely out of context or just makes stuff up) but sometimes Ann is so brilliant it takes a few seconds to think about what she said before you realize she's so unbelievably right on. She's a genius.

"But the basic point is accurate. Christianity is basically an add-on to Judaism, to put it simply."

Christianity is an add-on to parts of Judaism that the Christians don't find too inconvenient.

About the only parts of the Old Testament that most Christians worry about today are Biblical creation, the 10 Commandments and the parts about homosexuality being an offense punishable by death. They pretty much ignore the rest of the requirements.

Brian, do you realize there's a difference between saying everybody should be in your religion and saying you would kill everybody who's not?

Umm, yes. How is that relevant? Is anyone claiming she said the latter?

I don't believe in any god, but I expect people from every religion to think theirs is the best, it would be stupid to think otherwise.

It's one thing to think yours is the best and live your life content in your beliefs. It's another to actively say we should "throw away" the others and convert to yours. You do realize there's a difference, don't you?

For all you libs that have pounced on Coulter for being "hurtful", where were you when the following statements were made?

1. Reid - "The war is lost"
2. Durban and the Stalin/Hitler/Pol Pot references to our troops.
3. Jimmah Caaahta and his lovely statements about the jooooossssss in his recent writings.
4. Lurch Kerry and "terrorizing women and children in the dead of night" reference to our troops.
5 Dennis "Alpha Centari" Kucinich and our troops "targeting civilians for assination".
6. Barrack the Magic Negro stating the US warplanes purposely dropping munitions on civilians.
7. Ward "the unemployed" Churchill and his references to the 9/11 victims as "little Eichmanns.

Of course these are only really hurtful to those you disagree with, so as the KOS boy would say "screeeew theeem"!

It is deep down in most popular religions that your religion is the only true one and the world would be better off if everyone shared that religion. You may hear more "politically correct" tolerant statements from time to time, but if you look at the basic tenants of the religion, that's what it says. Sounds like Ann was simply being her usual NOT politically correct self. So, are you beating on her because she wasn't afraid to state what she believes, or because she believes something you find silly. Lets make sure you are fair and apply your derision to all devout Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists and Hindus if its the latter, and ignore you if its the former.

You have an odd definition of "sarcasm". I do not think it means what you think it means.

That evening, CNN reported that bombs were dropping in Afghanistan -- and then updated the report to say they weren't our bombs.

They should have been ours. I want them to be ours.

This is no time to be precious about locating the exact individuals directly involved in this particular terrorist attack. Those responsible include anyone anywhere in the world who smiled in response to the annihilation of patriots like Barbara Olson.
...
We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

Can we not all agree here that Ann could have chosen her words more carefully?

Jeebus I know I have to declare myself a Republican before even beginning to criticize Ann....which in itself is ridiculous she has more loyalty-blind- than any real republican candidate.

Now let's see I went to a paraochial school for eight years and NOT ONCE during CCD class did I have a nun explain it to me in quiet that way....well hell you know Catholics use that less than perfect book- not the Saint James version.

Ya Catholics ain't perfect no one is....

That's why Americans are suppose to espouse the value of separation of Church and State-...

You don't think that Ann's comments are hurtful?-fine.

BUT- let's push the 'idea" up and down the historical timeline-shall we?

Her "sentiment" or idea dove tails nicely with the rational as to why the Jews are hated the most by radical Muslims...

It's a stupid idea-and as a Republican commentatress-she doesn't have your best interests at heart-trust me.

Now the rest of you numskulls go do some research on the philosohical roots of Nazism-that'll take you through Neitzche and pre-determinism...

BTW-Coulter is the same "genius" that decided to use the word "stupider" and thinks women should not have the right to vote.

Republican women that defend her should learn to return the favor-she turns off more voters to the Republican cause than any other broad to date...

I probably should make that more clear so you can't "accidentally" take it the wrong way.

In your quoted section, as she compares them to Nazi Germany, she is obviously talking about nations we're at war with (Islamic-nutjob nations, not just Muslim nations) while in the radio interview, she was talking about Americans.

See the difference?

Now, I'm not defending her statement about invading and conversion, that's just stupid, but it surely got a bunch of lefties to froth and foam and that was the intended target.

Oh, I get it Brian and Barney; it's exactly the same thing when you're talking about terrorist nations and about Americans.

Your comment makes no sense. From your sarcasm (hint, epador: that is sarcasm), you imply that it's not the same thing. Which means it's OK to say it about one but not the other. One would presume your point is it's OK to say it about terrorist nations. Coulter said it about Jews and Judaism, which could imply either Israel or American Jews. So your point is that it's OK to say such things about them?

Her comments are being presented as either a) offensive or b) a fair representation of Christian beliefs.

Why can't it be both a) and b)? If I were Jewish I'd be pretty fucking offended by the deeply held beliefs of many Americans, specifically the belief that Jews are one step (embracing Jesus as savior) away from salvation. That. Is. Offensive. Why is that hard to understand?

To each his own, I guess, but as a conservative I have always appreciated Rush Limbaugh because I think he is incisive, fact-based and when criticized for his views a full transcript which clarifies the context of his comments almost always makes it quite clear his remarks are being intentionally misused by the opposition. Ann Coulter almost always turns me off and when I read the full transcript at the link you cite I am again disappointed. She is clearly not being hateful but she simply should not be taking the offensive on a subject (which boils down to theology in this case)about which she clearly lacks sufficient depth to sustain any advantage in an adversarial discussion. To me she comes across as an idiot and I am a Christian and a conservative.

No, I'm not saying it's okay to say it when talking about terrorist nations (you might have figured that out when I said, "that's just stupid")
I said they were different statements for different people.

I'll give you a synopsis of what she said in both instances.
In the "KIll and Convert" comment:
She said we should kill and convert our enemies who use their religion as a justification for killing us.

In the "Christianity is the best religion" comment:
She said that Christianity is the best religion and the world would be better if everybody were Christian.

See the difference? In one comment she was talking about America's enemies, in the other she was talking about the relative merit of religions.

She dislikes lefties much more than people of other religions (except for Islamic-nutjob types like the Taliban), and she doesn't call for your deaths, she just wants you people to educate yourselves.

Now, if you want to disagree on that point, that's fine, but please stop misinterpreting what I'm saying.

Just. Ignore. Her. She's like a flu bug: quit feeding it and it will die and your fever will go away and you will stop throwing up all over yourself. Also, she has an Adam's apple and hands like an NBA player.

I'll give you the relevant quote that was in Brian's comment We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.

You can tell she's talking about countries we're at war with by the way she compares them to how we fought against Nazi Germany and how she talks about war.

Yeah Barney, quit quoting her! When she says something bordering on criminally insane, she obviously means something much more inoffensive and less morally reprehensible. She just likes to sell books and enrage liberals! Gee, it really is amusing how angry we get when pundits with giant megaphones spitball ideas like mass murder and forced conversion as solutions to complex geopolitical problems! We're so insufferably testy!

Agreed. Coulter is not the spokesperson for Christianity. Jesus Christ (a nice Jewish boy from Nazareth) is. Anybody who wants to know what Christianity is about should read His words, not Ann Coulter's, not Billy Graham's. Then decide for yourself.

Incidentally, this includes a boatload of people who publicly call themselves "Christian" but don't act like it because they have never bothered to read how Christ said we should live. Read it, decide what you believe, and if you are more consumed with your hatred of (Jews, Muslims, homosexuals, insert whatever group here), please get out. You give Christianity a bad name.

Nobody said it wasn't offensive, they said it was different from the other statement and expected from any religion (i.e. "my religion is best and the world would be a better place if everybody were my religion", that's pretty much the standard for most religions)

Nobody said it wasn't offensive, they said it was different from the other statement

OK, so what's your point then? The premise of this post is that it wasn't offensive. But your very first post was:

Brian, do you realize there's a difference between saying everybody should be in your religion and saying you would kill everybody who's not?

Since the topic was the offensiveness of her statement, and your contention is that there's a difference between saying that and another thing, one can reasonably conclude that the distinction you were making was one of offensiveness. If not, then you were bringing something new into the discussion. What it was, I have no idea.

Now I have to assume it's purposeful misinterpretation.

Don't be so hard on yourself. I'm sure you were just anxious to type your post before thinking it through clearly.

Which seat is Ann running for? Will she be in the presidential box at the convention?

That's pretty darn funny. The left gets all angry when someone correctly quotes a politician from their favorite party and uses it against them, but thinks it's perfectly alright to attack the GOP because of the words of someone who supports that party but is not officially affiliated with it and whose members avoid her like the plague.

That's darn funny but expected from dim-bulbs like Barney the Moron.

I've gotta ask Barney, are you Barney Grumble from the Emperor's site a few years ago? AKA Barney the NetKKKop, AKA the guy who had to take the picture of Barney from the Simpsons down from his blog?

Ummmm, no Robert. Cassy said:Second, and really the better point, isn't it interesting how liberals tend to react when conservatives say something they don't like? There are cases all across the country of liberals burning conservative newspapers, unplugging microphones, causing near riots to try to stop a conservative speaker, and (most notably in Ann Coulter's case, although it has also happened to David Horowitz and William Kristol), throwing pies. There are a few conservatives who debase themselves to this level, but by and large, its liberals becoming unhinged -- trying to keep conservatives from making a point, or insulting said conservative and their values, because they then never have to argue it
She doesn't say it wasn't offensive.

Oh wait, I get it, you were confused by this partTherefore, people must be "offended" because anything that Ann Coulter says must be offensive to someone!

She was pointing out the knee-jerk reaction of nitwit lefties to Ann Coulter, they must be offended.
Now maybe Cassie will correct me (I already misread one of her posts today by not reading the last paragraph), but she was talking about lefties being "offended".

You might have figured that out by the title.

I of course was talking about you people saying she was calling for the deaths of Jews.

Yes, I think we should invite Ann, who says (gasp) wild things to sit in VIP seats at our national convention. That way we'd be announcing her as legit and saying what most people in our party think. Kinda like you did with "America brings misery to the world" and "Americans are the most stupid people on earth" oh yes and "More of our troops need to die to teach America a lesson" Michael Moore. Oh but wait, we'd never do such a thing. We're not like you guys. We have, uh, er, standards.

On the other hand, seating Michael Moore next to Jimmy Carter was brilliant. I think you SHOULD make sure the even-more-stupid than usual-dems (if that's possible) who think alike should sit together, since they have a lot in common.

She was pointing out the knee-jerk reaction of nitwit lefties to Ann Coulter, they must be offended.

Uh, yeah. The reference to it as "knee-jerk" aside, she was referring it to "lefties" finding it offensive, and said "What the controversy here is over, I have no idea." Thus indicating that she did not find it offensive. I didn't think that point was too subtle to grasp.

I of course was talking about you people saying she was calling for the deaths of Jews.

Where did I say that? In fact, what I said in response to your first post was:

The whole exchange strikes me as darkly comic, with Coulter just stringing along old intellectually dense Donny Douchebag (as we affectionately called him in the ad biz) along for a rhetorical and outrageous ride. I don't think she's the least bit serious. I could be and might be wrong about that, but Douchebag looks like a gullible dink who just can't quite figure out if she's serious or not. Therein lies the humor of it all for me.

Kinda reminds of Cameron Diaz in "Something About Mary" when she says "Ted...I'm fucking with you." And Ted is completely clueless. Much like Douchebag.

So if i get this right if a conservative says something bad about a liberal its haye speech if a liberal says anything bad about a conservative its free speech which just prove that liberals are the one who practice intolerence

Christians believe other Christians are going to hell all the time and they know that other Christians don't consider them real Christians for one reason or another.

It's why we just can't understand why, when Lutherans think Baptists are going to hell and Baptists think Church of Christ is going to hell (and they all agree Mormons are a cult), that people get all bent about someone thinking their religion is wrong.

Everyone thinks everyone else's religion is wrong. That's *normal*.

If all religions are right they are all wrong, or at least as important spiritually as a moms and tots support group.

How interesting it would be if liberals put as much effort into condemning the Iranian kidnapper's appearance at Columbia as they do in shouting down Ann Coulter.

Liberals could quell almost all questions about their patriotism if just one of them had the courage to fling a stale bagel at the Iranian Dinner Jacket kidnapper. Instead, they moan and cry about a woman who clearly is not intimidated by them....and is a hell of a lot smarter than most of them (I know, that's damning with faint praise). Guess who is laughing the most at this Coulter hate cult? The mullahs in the East.

Roy,
What Ann saying is part of Christian Dogma and can be found in the Bible
.
In the Old Testament God chose the descendants of Abraham to be his people (Gen 17:7, Deut 14:2.) He established a covenant with them (Gen 17:10-11, Gen 26:5, Exodus 31:16-17, Gen 9:12-15,). Throughout the Old Testament God give guidance rules for his people to follow about 613 which is The Law which is in the first 5 books of the Bible mostly (Exodus chapters 20-31; 35-39; the book of Leviticus; Numbers chapters 5-6; 8:1 - 9:14; chapters 26 - 30; and Deuteronomy 4:44 - 26:19.). Following the Law would bring blessings upon them. Deuteronomy 28:1-14. This only applied to Jews.

The sacrifice of animals in the Old Testament allowed the Jews to cleanse there sins for 1 year. (Lev 16:20) This with following all the Law was path for salvation. It was very demanding. However this allowed them to be Holy or set apart from the gentiles. Throughout the Old Testament we see them violate laws and are redeem to God. God promises to provide a Savior for them and the others.

Instead of 1 year of atonement through blood scarf ice of animals Christ provides permanent salvation though his sacrifice. (Hebrews 9-10).

Christian's believe that Jesus is the promise of the Old Testament manifested. Jews believe that the savior is yet to come.

Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law (Matt 5:17). Instead of needing to follow the 613 strictures of the law (works) and it only being limited to Jews through belief in Chris (John 3:16) all are saved both Jews and gentiles. Christians believe all have sin and through faith are we redeemed. (Romans 2-4)

Christ is therefore the prefect sacrifice. He is the completion of the promise made to Abraham but not just the Jews but all people can be saved by him and thus it is perfection.

So by doing a profession of Faith are Christians allowed into God presence while the Jews still follow the law and do works. Christian on the other had had faster track to salivation. We all wind up in heaven we just have a few less steps than our Jewish friends. Now is it easier? Maybe

, Is life fair? No

I mean Jesus was perfect sinless, and his reward was to be falsely accused, imprisoned, tortured and executed and guilty man was released in his stead. He also died young. That pretty much tells you that life is unfair and we have to some burdens to bear.

All this being said Jews are still God's chosen people and though they have faced tribulation for their faith in God those who persecute them will be punished by him.

Ann scored a toughdown, hit a home run, made a three pointer and won a grand slam in one interview. Think not, her name is on here several times and burned into the small brains of the lefties, never to be forgotten. Like Hanoi John, it is forever burned into their memory, but forever for the mentally ill may be after supper. Liberalism truly is a mental illness.

That talk radio the left feels the need to suppress combines anger and laughter into ridicule. Air America, in contrast, was just precious. The progressive narrative is thin, and has lost its predictive power since the megaphone of the MSM cracked its speaker.

Wait'll the public catches on that the globe is cooling.
====================

Ummmm, no Robert. Cassy said:
Second, and really the better point, isn't it interesting how liberals tend to react when conservatives say something they don't like? There are cases all across the country of liberals burning conservative newspapers, unplugging microphones, causing near riots to try to stop a conservative speaker, and (most notably in Ann Coulter's case, although it has also happened to David Horowitz and William Kristol), throwing pies. There are a few conservatives who debase themselves to this level, but by and large, its liberals becoming unhinged -- trying to keep conservatives from making a point, or insulting said conservative and their values, because they then never have to argue it
She doesn't say it wasn't offensive.

Oh wait, I get it, you were confused by this partTherefore, people must be "offended" because anything that Ann Coulter says must be offensive to someone!

She was pointing out the knee-jerk reaction of nitwit lefties to Ann Coulter, they must be offended.
Now maybe Cassie will correct me (I already misread one of her posts today by not reading the last paragraph), but she was talking about lefties being "offended".

You might have figured that out by the title.

I of course was talking about you people saying she was calling for the deaths of Jews.

Thank you, Veeshir.

Although really, the entire point of this post was to point out the lunacy of asking people to throw bagels at Ann Coulter. It's quite possibly one of the stupidest things I've ever heard, and you know, whether or not you were offended by her remarks, I'm sure most of you would agree on that front.

And yes, also, I found it interesting that this guy -- and many liberals -- are unwilling to take her on intellectually. Most of them just want to slander her, attack her, try to keep her from speaking, etc., rather than actually argue with her.

This post is not so much a defense of her remarks (which no, I didn't find that offensive), as it is a point-and-laugh post at this idiot who thinks the right way to handle his hurt little feelings is by encouraging people to throw bagels at Ann Coulter.

Come on, does anyone here really think that is not the most idiotic thing you've ever heard? I mean, there's not even any ingenuity in that. It's just stupid. On multiple levels.